[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Okay…I’m stupid, uninformed, naive and silly.
[/quote]
I don’t think so, lol.
My biggest issue is the inconsistency here. TTR’s response to this post confirms it. We drone strike some traitors and trade higher value assets for others, for what seems political accolades. It doesn’t reconcile to me.
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Okay…I’m stupid, uninformed, naive and silly.
Enlighten me.
What should have been done with the guy?
Mufasa[/quote]
My feelings aren’t quite as strong thethirdruffian, however, he should be severely punished if he did desert because soldiers, real soldiers, died searching for him. His allegedly dishonorable actions cost the lives of his fellow soldiers. That, bond if you will, is something we take very seriously and he apparently shit all over it. So ya, fuck him.
As far as how we got him back, I don’t have much of a problem with giving the Taliban back their garbage for him.
“…I don’t have much of a problem with giving the Taliban back their garbage for him…”
I thought I was alone in this thinking, USMCC.
From all that has come out; it seems like garbage for garbage.
Mufasa
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I am curious if men who served in our military still view Bergdahl as a soldier when all signs point to him being willing to seek out the Taliban. This is not a guy caught or captured on the battlefield, but an enemy sympathizer. Did we really bring an American home ?[/quote]
We brought an American home. We did not bring a American soldier home. [/quote]
This. Spot on.
The man deserves a traitor’s death. Look, the America I know, and loved enough to join my beloved Corps for is the America that doesn’t allow you to keep our people. None of them. Not even the shitbirds. We do what we have to do to get him back, and then he faces military justice. He isn’t a conscript, so he should ethically be punished more brutally than a civilian and held to a higher standard. You don’t get to just play soldier, you gotta live by our rules if you join. In the words of Bane, they should “hang him, where the whole world can see.”
In my America, you would NEVER entertain the thought of beheading an American and putting it on youtube.
Men died looking for Bowe. But they died doing a job they volunteered for. It’s small consolation, and Bowe should pay for their lives, but we NEVER leave a man behind.
Despite how we want to characterize this conflict, I still see this as a POW exchange. A POW exchange isn’t negotiating with terrorists. Besides, why are we complaining about letting these guys go? Now we can kill them.
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
“…I don’t have much of a problem with giving the Taliban back their garbage for him…”
I thought I was alone in this thinking, USMCC.
From all that has come out; it seems like garbage for garbage.
Mufasa[/quote]
That would be fine, in theory. But our garbage will be tried for being garbage and will spend (much of) his life in jail, whereas they will recycle their garbage, repurpose it, re-fang it, and let it loose upon us.
There is no moral equivalency in the trade.
[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I am curious if men who served in our military still view Bergdahl as a soldier when all signs point to him being willing to seek out the Taliban. This is not a guy caught or captured on the battlefield, but an enemy sympathizer. Did we really bring an American home ?[/quote]
We brought an American home. We did not bring a American soldier home. [/quote]
This. Spot on.
The man deserves a traitor’s death. Look, the America I know, and loved enough to join my beloved Corps for is the America that doesn’t allow you to keep our people. None of them. Not even the shitbirds. We do what we have to do to get him back, and then he faces military justice. He isn’t a conscript, so he should ethically be punished more brutally than a civilian and held to a higher standard. You don’t get to just play soldier, you gotta live by our rules if you join. In the words of Bane, they should “hang him, where the whole world can see.”
In my America, you would NEVER entertain the thought of beheading an American and putting it on youtube.
Men died looking for Bowe. But they died doing a job they volunteered for. It’s small consolation, and Bowe should pay for their lives, but we NEVER leave a man behind.
Despite how we want to characterize this conflict, I still see this as a POW exchange. A POW exchange isn’t negotiating with terrorists. Besides, why are we complaining about letting these guys go? Now we can kill them.
[/quote]
I agree.
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
In terms of what the President did, and how he did it being illegal?
Everything he does seems to either be put on the level of either High Treason or being Un-Constitutional…so I really have no idea what is true and what isn’t. I would imagine that him filling out a Tournament Bracket is probably unconstitutional in some way.
Mufasa [/quote]
According to the chair of the House Armed Services committee, Obama clearly violated the law. I didn’t make that shit up. OBAMA BROKE THE LAW. This article is from the most liberal source I could find. What is going to take for you to EVER admit that?
Myself (and MANY other Americans) believe that giving back FIVE important terrorists IS TREASON. As defined as “giving aid and comfort to the enemy”. Those fuckers are responsible for killing AMERICAN CITIZENS and that piece of shit just let them go. With out so much as a “by your leave” from Congress.
His executive actions are CLEARLY unconstitutional and I sincerely hope the SCOTUS rules it as such. This isn’t a “fuck Obama” session because of no reason at all. This president is out of control. And you want to give him a pass, so what does that make you?
Please don’t compare this to his basketball bracket - I don’t give a flying fuck about that. The facts are that this piece of shit president clearly violates the law and circumvents Congress whenever he sees fit and NO ONE HOLDS HIM ACCOUNTABLE.
I broke the law and I went to prison. I paid my debt and moved on. So when other people clearly break the law and publically get away with it (I’m thinking of politicians and bankers here) it kinda sorta pisses me the fuck off.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
In terms of what the President did, and how he did it being illegal?
Everything he does seems to either be put on the level of either High Treason or being Un-Constitutional…so I really have no idea what is true and what isn’t. I would imagine that him filling out a Tournament Bracket is probably unconstitutional in some way.
Mufasa [/quote]
According to the chair of the House Armed Services committee, Obama clearly violated the law. I didn’t make that shit up. OBAMA BROKE THE LAW. This article is from the most liberal source I could find. What is going to take for you to EVER admit that?
Myself (and MANY other Americans) believe that giving back FIVE important terrorists IS TREASON. As defined as “giving aid and comfort to the enemy”. Those fuckers are responsible for killing AMERICAN CITIZENS and that piece of shit just let them go. With out so much as a “by your leave” from Congress.
His executive actions are CLEARLY unconstitutional and I sincerely hope the SCOTUS rules it as such. This isn’t a “fuck Obama” session because of no reason at all. This president is out of control. And you want to give him a pass, so what does that make you?
Please don’t compare this to his basketball bracket - I don’t give a flying fuck about that. The facts are that this piece of shit president clearly violates the law and circumvents Congress whenever he sees fit and NO ONE HOLDS HIM ACCOUNTABLE.
I broke the law and I went to prison. I paid my debt and moved on. So when other people clearly break the law and publically get away with it (I’m thinking of politicians and bankers here) it kinda sorta pisses me the fuck off.
[/quote]
I’m not “giving the President a pass”, AC.
I am saying that in this Political climate I personally:
don’t know what to believe or NOT believe and
I have a suspicion that what he did most likely is AT THE VERY LEAST comparable to similar actions other President’s have taken. (In fact, I’m almost sure of it).
But this is President Obama…so I get it.
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
In terms of what the President did, and how he did it being illegal?
Everything he does seems to either be put on the level of either High Treason or being Un-Constitutional…so I really have no idea what is true and what isn’t. I would imagine that him filling out a Tournament Bracket is probably unconstitutional in some way.
Mufasa [/quote]
According to the chair of the House Armed Services committee, Obama clearly violated the law. I didn’t make that shit up. OBAMA BROKE THE LAW. This article is from the most liberal source I could find. What is going to take for you to EVER admit that?
Myself (and MANY other Americans) believe that giving back FIVE important terrorists IS TREASON. As defined as “giving aid and comfort to the enemy”. Those fuckers are responsible for killing AMERICAN CITIZENS and that piece of shit just let them go. With out so much as a “by your leave” from Congress.
His executive actions are CLEARLY unconstitutional and I sincerely hope the SCOTUS rules it as such. This isn’t a “fuck Obama” session because of no reason at all. This president is out of control. And you want to give him a pass, so what does that make you?
Please don’t compare this to his basketball bracket - I don’t give a flying fuck about that. The facts are that this piece of shit president clearly violates the law and circumvents Congress whenever he sees fit and NO ONE HOLDS HIM ACCOUNTABLE.
I broke the law and I went to prison. I paid my debt and moved on. So when other people clearly break the law and publically get away with it (I’m thinking of politicians and bankers here) it kinda sorta pisses me the fuck off.
[/quote]
I’m not “giving the President a pass”, AC.
I am saying that in this Political climate I personally:
don’t know what to believe or NOT believe and
I have a suspicion that what he did most likely is AT THE VERY LEAST comparable to similar actions other President’s have taken. (In fact, I’m almost sure of it).
But this is President Obama…so I get it.
Mufasa
[/quote]
I believe the opinions of the men who served with Bergdahl, and not one of them spoke highly of him. I’ll take that over the opinion of a journalist or politician any day of the week.
You should also not do anything to put your ass, and the asses of your fellow soldiers, into more danger than they’re already are in. There is no need to make war any more challenging.
The moment it was clear he was no longer in the fight, he should have been sent somewhere else.
I can only hope he is met with an appropriate welcome when he arrives at Leavenworth, I have to believe the fellas know how to take care of him.
[quote]Facepalm_Death wrote:
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
Thoughts? I still stand by the fact that it was right to bring him home. But now that he’s here…
I have a modicum of sympathy if you’re a draftee and a deserter. But Bergdhal is a stain on the entire Great State of Idaho. [/quote]
I tend to agree on the latter. I’m attempting not to let the media circus color my assessment but…nah I just can’t NOT hate him for desertion.
Regarding the former however, I don’t think it was right of us to give up 5 high level terrorists and negotiate with terrorists.
[/quote]
The whole transaction makes zero sense to me unless bergdahl was specifically on a mission to collect intel. What could even be gained from the trade? Who authorized it and why?[/quote]
Exactly!! Absolutely nothing could be gained from this. Nothing at all. EXCEPT a PR victory for Obama, which is why he did it and why he didn’t notify Congress, which an independent body came to the conclusion that he broke the law on.
And magick is right–we don’t negotiate with them. We hunt them down, exterminate them, and then take our hostages back over their smoking corpses.
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
In terms of what the President did, and how he did it being illegal?
Everything he does seems to either be put on the level of either High Treason or being Un-Constitutional…so I really have no idea what is true and what isn’t. I would imagine that him filling out a Tournament Bracket is probably unconstitutional in some way.
Mufasa [/quote]
According to the chair of the House Armed Services committee, Obama clearly violated the law. I didn’t make that shit up. OBAMA BROKE THE LAW. This article is from the most liberal source I could find. What is going to take for you to EVER admit that?
Myself (and MANY other Americans) believe that giving back FIVE important terrorists IS TREASON. As defined as “giving aid and comfort to the enemy”. Those fuckers are responsible for killing AMERICAN CITIZENS and that piece of shit just let them go. With out so much as a “by your leave” from Congress.
His executive actions are CLEARLY unconstitutional and I sincerely hope the SCOTUS rules it as such. This isn’t a “fuck Obama” session because of no reason at all. This president is out of control. And you want to give him a pass, so what does that make you?
Please don’t compare this to his basketball bracket - I don’t give a flying fuck about that. The facts are that this piece of shit president clearly violates the law and circumvents Congress whenever he sees fit and NO ONE HOLDS HIM ACCOUNTABLE.
I broke the law and I went to prison. I paid my debt and moved on. So when other people clearly break the law and publically get away with it (I’m thinking of politicians and bankers here) it kinda sorta pisses me the fuck off.
[/quote]
I’m not “giving the President a pass”, AC.
I am saying that in this Political climate I personally:
don’t know what to believe or NOT believe and
I have a suspicion that what he did most likely is AT THE VERY LEAST comparable to similar actions other President’s have taken. (In fact, I’m almost sure of it).
But this is President Obama…so I get it.
Mufasa
[/quote]
Well when you compare what he’s doing to his basketball bracket, it makes me feel (call me crazy) that his actions don’t really concern you…
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
“…I don’t have much of a problem with giving the Taliban back their garbage for him…”
I thought I was alone in this thinking, USMCC.
From all that has come out; it seems like garbage for garbage.
Mufasa[/quote]
That would be fine, in theory. But our garbage will be tried for being garbage and will spend (much of) his life in jail, whereas they will recycle their garbage, repurpose it, re-fang it, and let it loose upon us.
There is no moral equivalency in the trade.
[/quote]
I mean, I would of suicided all five of them via a drone strike about 3 minutes after the exchange, but no ones at the White House asked me…
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
“…I don’t have much of a problem with giving the Taliban back their garbage for him…”
I thought I was alone in this thinking, USMCC.
From all that has come out; it seems like garbage for garbage.
Mufasa[/quote]
That would be fine, in theory. But our garbage will be tried for being garbage and will spend (much of) his life in jail, whereas they will recycle their garbage, repurpose it, re-fang it, and let it loose upon us.
There is no moral equivalency in the trade.
[/quote]
I mean, I would of suicided all five of them via a drone strike about 3 minutes after the exchange, but no ones at the White House asked me…[/quote]
Well drone striking them would mean that the White House thought the Taliban were terrorists and…
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[/quote]
So that justifies it? That makes it okay? That means people can’t be pissed?
This justification, irrelevant of which side is using it, is bullshit and needs to end, now. I’m sorry the GodKing is president when people are fuckign tired of the status-quo, I really am, but I’m tired as shit of this being a taken as a valid remark.
At best, it is an admission by the person using it that their darling is just as shit as the other team’s darling they will be the first to crucify.
I guess HOPEing for CHANGE was a mistake then? Because this quote right here is we got MORE of the SAME.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
In terms of what the President did, and how he did it being illegal?
Everything he does seems to either be put on the level of either High Treason or being Un-Constitutional…so I really have no idea what is true and what isn’t. I would imagine that him filling out a Tournament Bracket is probably unconstitutional in some way.
Mufasa [/quote]
According to the chair of the House Armed Services committee, Obama clearly violated the law. I didn’t make that shit up. OBAMA BROKE THE LAW. This article is from the most liberal source I could find. What is going to take for you to EVER admit that?
Myself (and MANY other Americans) believe that giving back FIVE important terrorists IS TREASON. As defined as “giving aid and comfort to the enemy”. Those fuckers are responsible for killing AMERICAN CITIZENS and that piece of shit just let them go. With out so much as a “by your leave” from Congress.
His executive actions are CLEARLY unconstitutional and I sincerely hope the SCOTUS rules it as such. This isn’t a “fuck Obama” session because of no reason at all. This president is out of control. And you want to give him a pass, so what does that make you?
Please don’t compare this to his basketball bracket - I don’t give a flying fuck about that. The facts are that this piece of shit president clearly violates the law and circumvents Congress whenever he sees fit and NO ONE HOLDS HIM ACCOUNTABLE.
I broke the law and I went to prison. I paid my debt and moved on. So when other people clearly break the law and publically get away with it (I’m thinking of politicians and bankers here) it kinda sorta pisses me the fuck off.
[/quote]
I’m not “giving the President a pass”, AC.
I am saying that in this Political climate I personally:
don’t know what to believe or NOT believe and
I have a suspicion that what he did most likely is AT THE VERY LEAST comparable to similar actions other President’s have taken. (In fact, I’m almost sure of it).
But this is President Obama…so I get it.
Mufasa
[/quote]
Well when you compare what he’s doing to his basketball bracket, it makes me feel (call me crazy) that his actions don’t really concern you…[/quote]
It was not my intent to compare the two.
It was a poor attempt to illustrate a point…to point out the fact that just about everything he does is elevated to the level of treason, unconstitutionality, and ego-fulfillment.
For many people (including myself); it makes it difficult to know what to believe and what NOT to believe.
Mufasa
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
In terms of what the President did, and how he did it being illegal?
Everything he does seems to either be put on the level of either High Treason or being Un-Constitutional…so I really have no idea what is true and what isn’t. I would imagine that him filling out a Tournament Bracket is probably unconstitutional in some way.
Mufasa [/quote]
According to the chair of the House Armed Services committee, Obama clearly violated the law. I didn’t make that shit up. OBAMA BROKE THE LAW. This article is from the most liberal source I could find. What is going to take for you to EVER admit that?
Myself (and MANY other Americans) believe that giving back FIVE important terrorists IS TREASON. As defined as “giving aid and comfort to the enemy”. Those fuckers are responsible for killing AMERICAN CITIZENS and that piece of shit just let them go. With out so much as a “by your leave” from Congress.
His executive actions are CLEARLY unconstitutional and I sincerely hope the SCOTUS rules it as such. This isn’t a “fuck Obama” session because of no reason at all. This president is out of control. And you want to give him a pass, so what does that make you?
Please don’t compare this to his basketball bracket - I don’t give a flying fuck about that. The facts are that this piece of shit president clearly violates the law and circumvents Congress whenever he sees fit and NO ONE HOLDS HIM ACCOUNTABLE.
I broke the law and I went to prison. I paid my debt and moved on. So when other people clearly break the law and publically get away with it (I’m thinking of politicians and bankers here) it kinda sorta pisses me the fuck off.
[/quote]
I’m not “giving the President a pass”, AC.
I am saying that in this Political climate I personally:
don’t know what to believe or NOT believe and
I have a suspicion that what he did most likely is AT THE VERY LEAST comparable to similar actions other President’s have taken. (In fact, I’m almost sure of it).
But this is President Obama…so I get it.
Mufasa
[/quote]
Well when you compare what he’s doing to his basketball bracket, it makes me feel (call me crazy) that his actions don’t really concern you…[/quote]
Yeah, to be honest I’m kinda in the same boat with you. I’ll openly admit I’m not an Obama fan. I’ve been highly critical of him and I have defended GWB at numerous passes in the past during his administration. BUT I also criticized him as well, and he held views that I was not to share and was vocal about it. Mufasa you’re an intelligent, civil, and polite individual and as thunderbolt said a PWI institution whose posts I always make time to read.
However, I can’t ever remember seeing you even so much as criticize Obama for anything. Ever. I feel like the pattern points to a refusal to entertain critical notions of him, or apologize (as in, apologist) for him. I can’t obviously make any concrete conclusions because you are famous for not letting any of your political affiliations or tendencies slip into statements, but the pattern suggests not so much open and fair mindedness as fence sitting and waffling. I would like to see you level some hard criticisms for once, or at least not try to deflate legitimate criticisms with “I am pretty sure its on par with what other POTUS have done”. It might be, but then it doesn’t excuse the current law breaking or posturing or whatever you want to call it…and I don’t like it when the old POTUS do that either, so I’m not excusing any of them. With all respect mate, that’s how I see it.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[/quote]
So that justifies it? That makes it okay? That means people can’t be pissed?
This justification, irrelevant of which side is using it, is bullshit and needs to end, now. I’m sorry the GodKing is president when people are fuckign tired of the status-quo, I really am, but I’m tired as shit of this being a taken as a valid remark. [/quote]
Agree. Just because one asshat did it does not make it ok for the next asshat to do it and get away with it. Neither of them should have gotten away with it.
[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I am curious if men who served in our military still view Bergdahl as a soldier when all signs point to him being willing to seek out the Taliban. This is not a guy caught or captured on the battlefield, but an enemy sympathizer. Did we really bring an American home ?[/quote]
We brought an American home. We did not bring a American soldier home. [/quote]
This. Spot on.
The man deserves a traitor’s death. Look, the America I know, and loved enough to join my beloved Corps for is the America that doesn’t allow you to keep our people. None of them. Not even the shitbirds. We do what we have to do to get him back, and then he faces military justice. He isn’t a conscript, so he should ethically be punished more brutally than a civilian and held to a higher standard. You don’t get to just play soldier, you gotta live by our rules if you join. In the words of Bane, they should “hang him, where the whole world can see.”
In my America, you would NEVER entertain the thought of beheading an American and putting it on youtube.
Men died looking for Bowe. But they died doing a job they volunteered for. It’s small consolation, and Bowe should pay for their lives, but we NEVER leave a man behind.
Despite how we want to characterize this conflict, I still see this as a POW exchange. A POW exchange isn’t negotiating with terrorists. Besides, why are we complaining about letting these guys go? Now we can kill them.
[/quote]
This is an eminently reasonable position to take, and I respect it very much. I do have some problems with it however. First, we didn’t do anything like give back 5 high ranking terrorists to a cell in exchange for any of the journalists or other civilians we’ve lost to beheadings or captivity. So I don’t think the “we brought an American but not an American soldier home” remark works quite so well, because we didn’t attempt anything like this for the other civilian Americans we lost did we? No because that’s “negotiating with terrorists”. So that is a huge problematic double standard for me personally.
Second, in one sense a POW exchange status makes sense; this is an asymmetric war and they are un-uniformed combatants, but ok…I can somewhat see that. But these people don’t adhere to the rules uniformed combatants follow. They intentionally go after civilian targets. They intentionally plan mass attacks on civilians and civilian centers. These are not the actions of soldiers or guerilla fighters.
Thirdly, if this was a POW exchange then Obama NEEDED to follow the law and involve Congress. If we’re going to play like this is a legitimate thing then we need to do it legitimately according to forms and laws. He did not do that, and I have a MAJOR problem with that.
This guy is a piece of shit, and has no right to life considering his desertion directly led to deaths of soldiers looking for him. Fuck him.
I have no clue what obamao is smoking where trading 1 deserter piece of shit, for 4 high level enemies is in anyway logical or legal. You could maybe make a case for 1-1 trade, but 1-4; are you fucking kidding me?
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
This is an eminently reasonable position to take, and I respect it very much. I do have some problems with it however. First, we didn’t do anything like give back 5 high ranking terrorists to a cell in exchange for any of the journalists or other civilians we’ve lost to beheadings or captivity. [/quote]
Were these journalists ordered to go and conduct combat operation by their CIC? That to me makes a difference. Every one of these journalists, while their death is tragic, traveled to the Middle East of their own free will. I suppose you could say every service member joins of their own free will knowing they could be put in harms way, which is a fair criticism. The difference, in my mind, is that the journalists could of refused the assignment and at worst lost their job. A service member can not do that. Orders =/= assignments. Service members do not have the freedoms civilians do in a lot of ways this being one of them.
Now, that said and not remembering all of the details about the beheading you’re referring too, I suspect almost all real service members would of gladly volunteered to personally attempt a rescue operation for every one of those journalists even though they put themselves in harms way.
I’m probably not explaining myself very well, I just think it’s a different situation.